Under G.S. 14-208.18, it is a crime for certain sex offenders “to knowingly be at” certain locations, including “[o]n the premises of any place intended primarily for the use, care, or supervision of minors.” The court of appeals recently decided State v. Harris, a case concerning an indictment for that offense. The court’s opinion makes some interesting points, so I’ll set out the indictment, and then administer a quiz. The indictment alleged that the defendant did unlawfully, willfully and feloniously on the premises of Winget Park Elementary School, located at . . . Charlotte, North Carolina. A place intended primarily for the use, care, or supervision of minors and defendant is a registered sex offender. On appeal, the defendant identified several alleged defects in the indictment. So here’s the quiz: which of the following problems, if any, did the court of appeals view as requiring relief for the defendant? a. The omission of “go” or “be” from the phrase “did unlawfully, willfully and feloniously on the premises b. The failure to allege “knowingly,” which is the mens rea term used in G.S. 14-208.18 c. The lack of any antecedent for the phrase “[a] place intended primarily for the use, care, or supervision of minors” d. The failure to specify that the defendant’s reportable conviction was for an offense in Article 7A of Chapter 14 e. None of the above, the court determined that the indictment was sufficient The answer is after the break. As to the omission of “go” or “be,” [...]
Faculty Coordinators
